Engineering 6101
Information about the Commentaries
on Class Presentations
General Information: You must submit
at least 2 brief papers on the guest lectures
and subsequent class presentations. Each paper should be approximately 2
typed double spaced pages. In the paper you should explain and discuss an
ethical issue raised by the lecture and/or class presentation.
Due Dates: Papers are due
no later than 2 weeks after the relevant Thursday discussion class. See
the course outline for a more detailed breakdown
Grading: You may submit
up to four commentaries (i.e., one on every topic except
the topic your presentation will deal with). Your overall
grade for the commentaries will be based on your two best grades on the papers
you submit.
Format and Content: The intent of the assignment
is to give you practice at argumentative writing (i.e., writing that argues
for a particular point). The particular ethical issue
you focus on in a commentary is up to you, provided that it is related to
either the guest lecture or in-class presentation your commentary is a response
to. You should be careful, however, to pick a topic
that you can deal with adequately in only a couple of pages. Do not feel that you need to deal with all (or even most)
of the points raised in the class presentation or guest lecture. In most cases, it will not be possible to do this adequately.
Writing the in the first
person is OK. However, don’t go overboard with it. Remember
that saying “I think that X” is often unnecessary. Why
not just say “X”?
Although the paper is
brief, it should be structured like a formal essay. While
other formats are possible, something like the following is a good guide:
1. Introduction: Briefly set out the purpose
of the paper. Typically, this will involve briefly
explaining the issue to be discussed in the paper and indicating the position
you will be taking on the issue. (There’s no need to support your position
in this section of the paper. Save that for later
on in the paper.) In a paper of this length, this section should be brief.
E.g., Explain that the
purpose of the paper is to assess the government of
2. Full Explanation
of the Issue: Give
a clear and full account of the issue you will discuss in the paper. Ideally, this should be an explanation of the issue that
would make sense to an intelligent reader who had seen neither the guest
lecture nor the class presentation you are responding to.
E.g., Briefly explain
what the tar ponds are, why they pose a problem and why anyone might think
it was the provincial government’s problem.
3. Defence of a Position
on the Issue: This
is the most important section of the paper. Here,
you should develop and defend a position on the issue. Focus
here on presenting an argument in favour of your position, not just on stating
your view. For the most part, I’m not
concerned with what you think, but with why you think it. Here, it will help to consider how an intelligent reader
might disagree with you.
E.g., Why should the
government do a full cleanup? What would you say to
someone who thought the cost of cleanup (rather than containment) would be
better spent on education, health care, etc.?
4. Conclusion: Sum up the main points
of your paper. In a paper of this length, this section should be brief.